Major Sino/US differences remain unresolved ahead of Trump and Xi Jinping's planned end of November meeting on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

According to Bloomberg News, a detailed Trump regime US trade representative (USTR) report "accused China of continuing a state-backed campaign of intellectual property and technology theft as the World Trade Organization said it would establish a dispute panel to rule on the complaint."

USTR Robert Lighthizer's report claimed "China fundamentally has not altered its acts, policies, and practices related to technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation, and indeed appears to have taken further unreasonable actions in recent months."

Washington is more concerned about China's growing economic, financial and military strength than America's large trade deficit with the country.

The reality of China becoming the world's largest economy in the years ahead is unacceptable to Republicans and undemocratic Dems alike. Its Made in China 2025 policy aims to transform the country into a global industrial and high-tech manufacturing powerhouse.

Washington considers it a threat to its regional economic, financial, and military dominance - its strategy to prevent it unlikely to succeed.

Its ability to pressure, bully, bribe and threaten smaller, weaker countries to bend to its will doesn't work with stronger ones like China - able to withstand US toughness.

Deputy USTR Dennis Shea accused Beijing of distorting world markets by promoting what he called "non-market" policies.

An unnamed Chinese official called his claims unfounded, saying they divert attention from US WTO violations. Both countries accused each other of hypocrisy, making resolution of major differences all the harder.

Ongoing trade war could get much worst if Trump follows through on his threat to raise existing tariffs on Chinese goods from 10 to 25%, along with imposing US duties on all remaining Chinese imports not so far affected.

Washington has a disturbing habit of blaming other countries for its own abusive practices. US Council of Economic Advisors chairman Kevin Hasset hinted that the Trump regime may seek China's eviction from the WTO.

In October, WTO director-general Roberto Azevedo warned about the threat to the global economy from the unresolved Sino/US trade war, saying:

"Potentially, millions of workers would need to find new jobs; firms would be looking for new products and markets; and communities for new sources of growth."

Whether Trump and Xi can agree to prevent things from escalating further when they meet in Buenos Aires next week remains to be seen.

Days earlier, China's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said "(w)e hope that the US side could follow the consensus reached by the two heads of state during their recent phone call, focus on cooperation, remove disturbances, and engage in serious consultations on issues of mutual concern with good faith on the basis of mutual respect, reciprocity and mutual benefit so as to reach a proposal acceptable to the two sides and bring into reality the aspiration of ensuring sound and steady development of China-US relations and expanding bilateral economic and trade cooperation."

International commercial diplomacy expert Cheng Dawei believes the "best outcome of (Xi/Trump discussions at the G20) is short-term reconciliation" - both leaders agreeing on avoiding implementation of further harsh steps, making bilateral relations far worse than already if things go this way.

Fundamental differences between both sides are too world's apart to be easily, if ever, resolved to the satisfaction of both countries.

US rage for dominance could result in direct confrontation between both countries ahead. Repeated US South China Sea provocations could spark it.

When other methods fail to get nations to bend to Washington's will, war is its favored strategy.

Confronting China, Russia, or even Iran militarily would take on nations able to hit back much harder than less powerful nations the US attacked so far.

It's unclear how far Washington is willing to go to force its will on all nations, especially powerful ones able to hit back as hard as they're struck.